 MaggsPremium
join:2002-11-29
Woodside, NY
 ·RCN CABLE
| Bad Service If you give me substandard service and I can prove you're giving me substandard service, I should be let out of the contract for free.
Take for instance, you buy a new PC that shuts off after 2 minutes of use, and it is brand new. Would that be acceptable if the PC maker charged you a $200 ETF for bringing back the piece of junk. Basically, ETF are designed to keep you locked to a carrier whether or not you get good service. If you get bad service, they got you by the balls anyway. ETFs are a pure cash cow for the industry. How hard is it to digitally provision a phone on a network.
Any company that has to tie you into a contract for their services and charge you an ETF is a company not worth doing business with. Quality of service and value of service should be the only deciding factors in a purchase decision.
--
NIL ILLEGITIMUS CARBORUNDUM! |
|
|
|
 visio
join:2001-08-29
Pompano Beach, FL | wow. that example was a poor one. if my new pc turned off after 2 minutes, i would return it. but guess what, if i bought a phone and it turned off within 2 minutes, i would return it as well without having to pay an etf. 2min would be noticed well within my 30 days that i have to try out the service.
as for the etf, it's designed to recover the cost of the phone and gain profit. thats the point of any business, releive costs, and make profit. if you aren't willing to pay an etf, dont sign a contract saying you're willing to pay an etf. |
|
| *sigh*
The ETF is not a blatant attempt to get profit. It's a blatant attempt to keep customers from jumping ship. There's a difference.
I said it before and I'll repeat myself...there are customers out there who like to "window shop" - that is, jump from carrier to carrier testing phones and stuff. Carriers don't like customers who do that, they want loyalty and guaranteed income streams. I'm the kind of customer who gets to know the carrier BEFORE signing up, so I know what I'm getting into before I commit. I've been with T-mobile nearly 4 years now and don't plan to leave, even though Verizon has a better hardware selection to choose from. T-mobile is the most fair when it comes to plans, deposits, etc...the "Monayy" to quote Vince McMahon.
I think the ETF should be prorated, yes. I also think it should be pro-rated with 100% proportion to price as per previous example. But I don't blame them for applying the ETF nor do I think the answer is "go prepaid and pay full price of phone". If the phone hardware pricing were more in line with the TRUE value of the phone, I would support that option, but you can't convince me that any Nokia phone is worth more than $200. Sorry. |
|
 mikes60My ParadisePremium
join:2001-07-31
Boynton Beach, FL
·Comcast
 ·AT&T Southeast
 ·Vonage
| said by ReVeLaTeD:*sigh* If the phone hardware pricing were more in line with the TRUE value of the phone, I would support that option, but you can't convince me that any Nokia phone is worth more than $200. Sorry. Phones are sold at a retail price, including the expected profit.
Are all phones worth the retail price? Probably not; just as a Lexus is probably not worth that much more than a Toyota Camry.
You can buy unlocked phones more reasonably on Ebay, or from other alternate sources. If you buy from a carrier, or conventional retailer- they will make a profit. So would I.
Since I'm happy with my carrier, I have recently bought 2 Blackberrys for $99 each- and signed for another 2 years on each account. That is far below the actual cost to the carrier.
I also have 2 unlocked phones which I bought on Ebay for a lot less than the carrier's regular retail price.
--
No good deed goes unpunished. |
|
| There's a difference between "making a profit" and using it as an excuse to ream customers.
A phone that took $125 to make should be priced around $200. That's fair enough I think. But the CEOs wouldn't be able to take home billion dollar profits. That's the trick. |
|
